Does Everything Make a Difference?

[Chops]

I have a Stratos, they are single ended. While there is an XLR in, pin 3 is left completely disconnected. IMO, XLR in should be an extra cost option with an input trafo used, but since that's not the case RCA in is better.

Yes, I know they are single ended, but the amps were apparently ordered that way for the previous owner. And considering I already had 30' of balanced cables running to the front of the room (let alone the only cables long enough to reach to the front of the room), I used the balanced inputs on the amps.

It was shortly after that I was having noise issues and I purchased the new single ended cables which resolved the issue.

 

[Chops]

Audioholics debunks everything. In particular, they think a lot of things are below the level of our perception that are not.

Whether you correctly attribute dielectric absorption to what you hear is another story though.

I agree. Gene (Audioholics) does in fact "debunk" everything and thinks all of the differences we hear in cables is in our heads. He's about as wrong, annoying and useless as Amir over on ASR.

I met Gene a couple years ago at the first Florida Audio Expo when he got Covid. Needless to say, he's a rather stuck-up dude. Unless you're a exhibitor or fellow YT'er, he wants nothing to do with you.

 

[Kingrex]

You're better off buying Neotech UPOCC copper or silver wire.

Why. It has no geometry. Its just strait solid wire. I have no idea how to manage it for audio purposes. Do I use 1 wire of multiple of different gauges. Do I braid it. Twist it. Leave it transmission style.

 

[DaveC]

Why. It has no geometry. Its just strait solid wire. I have no idea how to manage it for audio purposes. Do I use 1 wire of multiple of different gauges. Do I braid it. Twist it. Leave it transmission style.

Star Quad makes for pretty good SC. Add some material to provide mechanical damping, for internal cable wrapping it with an old cotton t shirt or rag works.

UPOCC wire is superior to other types, I think Icono even uses it, they just charge a fortune. Neotech is a lot less expensive and have been making UPOCC wire for longer than any other mfg'er.

 

[tima]

But you also have no proof that what you hear is because of dielectric differences specifically.

I made no claim about proof of anything. I was expressing skepticism about that article being relevent.

if you have some case to make, try some other way.

 

[Folsom]

I made no claim about proof of anything. I was expressing skepticism about that article being relevent.

if you have some case to make, try some other way.

no

 

[Tuckers]

I have personally heard differences in about 75% of your list Ron. Differences do not equal better, and some differences are trivial and not worth pursuing.

 

[stehno]

Karen Sumner has a wonderful way of summarizing the essentials.

In this particular case I agree.

When making comparisons and adjustments and experimenting with components and set up, I always ask myself one question: does it sound more natural?

Peter, you make a very interesting point when you said you ask yourself, does it sound more natural?

I can’t speak for Karen but my interpretation and understanding about our ear/brain possessing some instinctual process when discerning sonic changes is that it’s more instinctual – more like a universal in-borne type of instinct. And though I’ve certainly asked your same question too many times - if I start to analyze. But in most all my times of observing sonic changes more than anything else I found myself more instinctively saying, that sounds more natural. A more gut instinct-type of reaction rather than an instinctively asking an analytical question that requires further analysis.

IOW, regardless of Karen’s original intent, I took her claim a bit more on its face at a gut instinct level rather than an analytical level. Anyway, that’s how I perceived Karen’s message and it makes sense to me in that context since that’s also been my observation. Then again, since I'm not listening to a live performance, most times I'm listening for potential compromises induced by the playback electronics i.e. things we'd never hear nor concern ourselves with during a live performance.

 

[PeterA]

In this particular case I agree.


Peter, you make a very interesting point when you said you ask yourself, does it sound more natural?

I can’t speak for Karen but my interpretation and understanding about our ear/brain possessing some instinctual process when discerning sonic changes is that it’s more instinctual – more like a universal in-borne type of instinct. And though I’ve certainly asked your same question too many times - if I start to analyze. But in most all my times of observing sonic changes more than anything else I found myself more instinctively saying, that sounds more natural. A more gut instinct-type of reaction rather than an instinctively asking an analytical question that requires further analysis.

IOW, regardless of Karen’s original intent, I took her claim a bit more on its face at a gut instinct level rather than an analytical level. Anyway, that’s how I perceived Karen’s message and it makes sense to me in that context since that’s also been my observation. Then again, since I'm not listening to a live performance, most times I'm listening for potential compromises induced by the playback electronics i.e. things we'd never hear nor concern ourselves with during a live performance.

that’s more or less my experience. I don’t sit there asking does something make a difference. I ask if it sounds more natural. It’s a gut sensation but also just sort of an innate sense of what sounds right. It’s also how my body responds. Do I start tapping my feet to the music unconsciously?

Analyzing the sound in terms of sonic attributes is picking apart the music into bits and pieces, and that is an artificial exercise. Perhaps helpful if trying to explain to someone else in detail to satisfy their curiosity, but it’s not what I do when listening to live music and it’s not really what I want to do listening at home.

 

[Argonaut]

Peter, you make a very interesting point when you said you ask yourself, does it sound more natural?

And yet , based purely upon various uploaded content , your system portrays recordings in a singularly disparate way to PeterA’s …
Which one is the true *Natural* sound ?

 

[stehno]

And yet , based purely upon various uploaded content , your system portrays recordings in a singularly disparate way to PeterA’s …
Which one is the true *Natural* sound ?

LOL. That's for you to figure out.

 

[tima]

Analyzing the sound in terms of sonic attributes is picking apart the music into bits and pieces, and that is an artificial exercise. Perhaps helpful if trying to explain to someone else in detail to satisfy their curiosity, but it’s not what I do when listening to live music and it’s not really what I want to do listening at home.

Well said. Analytic listening strikes me as an amusical exercise.

 

[Argonaut]

LOL. That's for you to figure out.

Already have … Neither What do you think ?

 

[Argonaut]

Well said. Analytic listening strikes me as an amusical exercise.

Is this not exactly the methodology with which professional , and non professional enthusiast reviewers of classical recordings apply their considerations when reviewing/commenting upon a recording ? Do they merely kick back with a couple of fingers of single malt and a cigar on ! And pronounce …”Wow that was natural ... Not that I was present at the Sofiensaal, Vienna during 1958 and 1965 when Solti / Culshaw /Decca recorded Wagners Ring Cycle !

Whats all this about then ?

“Here is a sampling of my music reviews, all at TAB:”

Beethoven - Concerto No. 4 in G Major, Glenn Gould
Schubert - Trout Quintet
Horowitz at Carnegie Hall: An Historic Return
Schumann - Kreisleriana
Béla Bartók: Concerto for Piano and Orchestra No. 1, Rhapsody for Piano and Orchestra, Op. 1 Béla Bartók: Concertos for Piano and Orchestra Nos. 2 and 3

 

[stehno]

Already have … Neither What do you think ?

Considering the fact that I never used the word natural by its lonesome in this and perhaps any other thread unless its preceded with the adjective more or less, I think you’re a bit aloof.

Given that and the fact that you said neither of our videos sounded “natural” when at least I've never made such a claim and/or that your judgment here was somehow noteworthy, I suspect you’re perhaps even more aloof than I initially gave you credit for above.

 

[treitz3]

Hello and good evening to you, gentlemen. Please focus on the topic being discussed, rather than the person discussing it. Thanks.

Tom

 

[rob]

It is often said by many audiophiles that "everything makes a difference." Beyond different cables and different components making a difference, these folks mean that everything makes a difference:

-- the metallurgy of the duplex outlet wall cover plate

-- a block of wood or other material on the top of a component

-- a Shun Mook disc or Shakti Stone on the top of an amplifier

-- the power cord going into the power supply of a turntable motor

-- the DAC is plugged in when you are listening to vinyl

-- interconnects are elevated above the floor

-- the metallurgy of the wire carrying power from the electrical sub-panel servicing the listening room to the outlets into which components are lugged

-- different fuses in a component

-- power cables are not criss-crossed with signal cables

-- an unused amplifier is sitting on the floor of the listening room

-- the connector on the speaker cable is Rhodium plated or not

-- the unused jacks on the pre-amp are plugged up

-- a coffee table is in front of the listening chair

-- an extra piece of wire "dongle" is inserted somewhere

-- a block of wood or steel or granite underneath a component

-- the ASC TubeTrap is diffusion side out or absorption side out

-- a clock is plugged into a AC outlet in the listening room

-- the wire coming out of your Wi-Fi router

-- the USB extension bus ("switch") going to your streamer

-- etc.

Does everything really make a difference? Or do we just believe -- or do we just want to believe -- that everything makes a difference?

Do we want to believe that everything makes a different because we think we can hear a difference?

On your list i don't believe everything makes a difference.
Maybe agree with 20%
Sure, a coffee table, tube traps etc, also cable orientation plugged jacks if having issues with noise.

Add-ons and tweaks are all extra sales for the retailer and independent sellers. Often with crazy margins.

Sometime i think people want to believe they can hear a difference, also saying you can't in public or on a forum there can be a fear (for some) that they don't possess golden ears or your system isn't good/revealing enough.

Let's face it, the majority of audiophiles are of a certain age 50/60/70+ and our hearing certainly doesn't improve with age.

Could we really expect a 70 year old to hear any difference with a piece of wood or Shakti rock placed on a component?

 

[Gregm]

Add-ons and tweaks are all extra sales for the retailer and independent sellers. Often with crazy margins.

Interesting - however, Ron's post was about a difference in sound - not the profitability of aftermarket peripherals, etc

Could we really expect a 70 year old to hear any difference with a piece of wood or Shakti rock placed on a component?

I understand where you're going and the most probable response would be, no.

However, there seem to be two approaches to Ron's original question:

a) "does everything make a difference": i.e. does a change in the physical and /or electrical set up, modulate the sonic result.
In theory, whatever change you introduce will affect the attributes of the system which, in many cases, begs the next appraoch to the original question:

b) Is said difference significant, perceptible, ground breaking? In most cases (in my case), probably not.

 

[tima]

Is this not exactly the methodology with which professional , and non professional enthusiast reviewers of classical recordings apply their considerations when reviewing/commenting upon a recording ? Do they merely kick back with a couple of fingers of single malt and a cigar on ! And pronounce …”Wow that was natural ... Not that I was present at the Sofiensaal, Vienna during 1958 and 1965 when Solti / Culshaw /Decca recorded Wagners Ring Cycle !

Whats all this about then ?

“Here is a sampling of my music reviews, all at TAB:”

Beethoven - Concerto No. 4 in G Major, Glenn Gould
Schubert - Trout Quintet
Horowitz at Carnegie Hall: An Historic Return
Schumann - Kreisleriana
Béla Bartók: Concerto for Piano and Orchestra No. 1, Rhapsody for Piano and Orchestra, Op. 1 Béla Bartók: Concertos for Piano and Orchestra Nos. 2 and 3

This seems very off topic so I will say only this:

"Whats all this about then ?"

That question is unclear, but that's okay. The quote you copied from my profile shows links to published record reviews I wrote while writing for The Audio Beat. Did you read them? I'm not the right person to discuss with you the methodologies of other wrters.

In my work, writing a record review is a different activity from listening for pleasure. I did not choose the records. I suppose you could call it an amusical activity. A competent reader will recognize that my record reviews of classical music talk about the music on the record. Often they contain background context and historical information about the compostion(s), performer(s) and performance(s). They usually have some commentary on the physical record and the sound/sonics of the record. Reviews of records at TAB are required to include a simple rating for sound and music.

 

[Kingrex]

Analyzing the sound in terms of sonic attributes is picking apart the music into bits and pieces, and that is an artificial exercise. Perhaps helpful if trying to explain to someone else in detail to satisfy their curiosity, but it’s not what I do when listening to live music and it’s not really what I want to do listening at home.

Well said. Analytic listening strikes me as an amusical exercise.

Very true. But at times analysis is required to setup the system for optimum performance. The hard part is taking off your analysis hat and putting on the relaxation and comfort hat.